Was Asho Zarathushtra Spitama, the Founder of the Good
Religion, a priest by birth and profession? Did he perpetuate the priestly class
in the new order? Was the priestly class a hereditary system before and after
Zarathushtra? Is the present custom of hereditary priesthood a Zarathushtrian
tradition? Is the initiation of a minor boy into priesthood an age-old custom?
Does initiation into priesthood mean memorizing unintelligible recitations in
Avesta and Pazend and learning how to perform equally unintelligible rituals? Is
priesthood confined to the male gender only? The answers to these questions, and
perhaps many more, may be found by examining the passages in the extant Avesta
which deal with the priestly profession. Here is an attempt. It will, however,
not go into details to reconstruct the simple rituals performed in the Gathic
age and the elaborate rites current during the later Avestan period, a subject
partially presented in the author's book Zarathushtrian Ceremonies, a
reconstruction based on the Gathas.

The Avesta remains the main source of our information. If not composed
entirely by the priests, it has definitely been preserved by them alone. In
fact, we owe the extant Avesta--as our ancestors did for what is extinct
now--with its fair accuracy, to the sharp, faithful memory of the priests, and
they deserve full credit for this. It should, therefore, speak about them more
than any other professionals. However, we know that a part of the Avesta has
been lost. We shall refer, if necessary, to Pahlavi writings to find the missing
clues. Fortunately, the Denkard in
Pahlavi of 9th century CE has left us with a fairly good list of the contents of
the Sassanian collection of the twenty-one Avestan nasks. We have the Pahlavi
commentaries of most of the Avestan passages which deal with the priestly class.
In addition, the reports on Iranian priests left by Greek historians may also
prove of some help.

The terms used in the Avesta which could be translated as
"priest" are numerous. The main term isâthravan
(Pahlavi âsravan, âsron,
âsrok; Zoroastrian Persian âsrűn).
Aethrapaiti (Pahlavi erpat,
herpad; Persian hîrbad; Parsi
Gujarati ervad), a
"school-master," is used today to mean an ordained priest. Besides,
ahu and ratu
of the Gathas have been rendered in Pahlavi as ahu or xvatây (Persian xodây
or sardâr, Sanskrit swâmi--meaning
lord and master) and dastvar (Persian dastűr,
Sanskrit gurű--meaning teacher, preceptor, leader, director). Although the
Gathic magavan, member of the
Zarathushtrian fellowship Maga (S
6.7, 16.15 = Y 33.7, 51.15), has never been used in the Later Avesta, Old
Persian magu (Greek magoi,
English magus, plural magi) and
the subsequent Pahlavi magopat, mowbad;
Persian mobad, mobed) mean
a member of the priestly class. There are eight functional terms: zoatar,
hâvanân, âtrevakhsh, frâberetar, âberet, âsnâtar, raethwishkara, and
sraoshâvareza.

In addition to the above-mentioned terms there is Vâstar,
a term never used for "priest". It occurs twice in the Avesta and
that too in the Gathas alone--Yatha Ahu
and Song 2.1. And lastly, there is a Gathic term mâńthran
which too has never been used for the function. We shall, in our study, briefly
discuss each of them and see which word stands for "priest" and which
does not. We shall begin with the Gathic and then refer to others parts of the
Avesta.

Gathic References

The
five Gathas, from Yathâ Ahű to Â
Airyemâ Ishyâ (Songs
1-17 = Yasna 27.13,14; 28-34; 43-51; 53; 54.1), are the only words of
Asho Zarathushtra. Of the above terms, we have six only: ahu,ratu, vâstar, mâńthran,
magavan, and zaotar.

Literally ahu means "Being" and
therefore a dignitary. It is the same word as "ahura" which, with an
addition of an emphasizing suffix ra, means
"the Being," Lord, God. The main task of the
ahu, according to the Gathas, is to cleanse the oppressed world from
"fury, rapine, outrage, and aggression" and "to "repel the
fury of the wrongful."(S 2.1-2) It generally occurs with ratu,
and applies to Zarathushtra only. It is, therefore, discussed here along
with ratu. As already said, it is
rendered as "lord" and "master."

Although ratu, originally a "righteous and precise leader," has not
survived in its original meaning or as an exclusive term for priest, we shall
discuss it also, because it has been, as already said, rendered as dastavar/dastur
in Pahlavi/Zoroastrian Persian writings for a leading judge-priest. It has
survived as rad in Pahlavi, meaning
"spiritual chief, master, leader," and in Persian, meaning "wise,
scholar" and conventionally "brave, hero."

The Gathic term ratu is derived from eret,
meaning "to do right, to act properly." It means the righteous
leader who guides people with his constructive plans and programs, to peace,
prosperity, happiness, and bliss. The term has been used six times in the
Gathas. These instances describe the position and the functions of a ratu.
"The leader of the living
world ... offer[s] civilization, nourishment, and strength," and "acts
with righteousness." (S 2.2, 2.6 = Y 29)
"According
to the Primal Principles of Life, the leader, with his actions, does full
justice to the wrongful and to the righteous, as well as to the person whose
falsity is combined with his probity."(S 6.1 = Y 34)
A leader is a life-healer who inspires one "through good mind and
protects [him or her] with[in] the divine dominion."
(S 9.16 = Y 44)> A "true leader of the lawful ... is a humble
intellectual" and as a settler, strengthens the world with righteousness by
his proper actions.(S 16.5 = Y 51) He
is chosen by a world groaning under "fury, rapine, outrage, and
aggression" to render it rehabilitated and led to "true
civilization."(S 2 = Y 29)

To
sum up the Gathic concept of a leader (ratu),
he or she is a humble, yet inspiring intellectual who justly leads the righteous
and wrongful as well as the intermediates to promote the living world to peace
and prosperity, and ultimately to wholeness and immortality.

In
an eulogy in honor of Zarathushtra in the Farvardin Yasht, it is poetically said
that the very Primal Principles of Life he expounded in his songs wished him to
be the lord (ahu) and leader (ratu).(Yt
13.92) Other parts
of the Avesta acknowledge Zarathushtra as the "first and foremost lord and
leader of the material world, particularly human beings," ... because it
was he who conveyed "the entire thought-provoking message, the righteous
teaching" to humanity.(Yt 13.41; 90-92, 152; Y 70.1; Vp 2.4; 11.21;
16.3) In fact, "Zarathushtra is the lord and leader" of all the
people whom "Ahura Mazda knows better for their veneration done in
accordance with righteousness."(Vp16.3)
The
Later Avesta forgets that the leader is to be "chosen" by the people
and considers his leadership as an appointment by God.(Yt
5.89; 8.44) It is a
deviation from the Gathic concept of free will and choice, the first deviation
noticed so far. Zarathushtra’s son Urvatad-nara is strangely mentioned as
"lord and leader" of the legendary refuge of King Yima Khshaeta (Jamshid)
in an out of context passage.(V 2.43)

Vâstar,
derived from vas, "to
settle" and its causative form of vâs,
"to settle others," literally means "one who settles and
rehabilitates people," In the Yatha
Ahu formula and Song 2, Vâstar
stands for Zarathushtra alone, because, once chosen as the good lord and
righteous leader of mankind, he rehabilitates the drigu,
the oppressed, who are deprived of their rights. It, therefore, means
"settler, rehabilitator." Vâstra,
the other derivative, which means "settlement," is used by
Zarathushtra for his movement aimed at settling the oppressed, displaced,
unproductive, parasitical, or nomadic peoples in an activated world-promoting
Fellowship of a settled life. Vâstrya means
a settled person, one belonging to vâstra.
But some translators, intentionally or unintentionally, have followed the
Pahlavi rendering of vâstar and vâstrya
as "shepherd," and vâstra as
"pasture" to render Zarathushtra a shepherd who had risen to protect
cattle from cruelty. Others have been more kind and have conventionally
translated the three cognat terms as pastor, pasture, and pasturage with a
spiritual tint and religious meaning and have elevated him to be a Shepherd of
human sheep. Perhaps they have Jesus Christ, Christian pastors, and Krishna Gopâl in view.

With
the exception of the above solitary and obviously dubious passage about
Zarathushtra's son, Avestan and Pahlavi records do not state that any person
other than Zarathushtra was chosen or appointed as the lord (ahu)
and rehabilitator (vâstar). Perhaps,
with the world well on its path of righteousness and the causes of evil and
disorder expounded, there was no need to have one. As a chosen ahu
and vâstar, Zarathushtra had shown
the way to eliminating evil, rehabilitating the displaced and leading the world
to civilization. And he alone deserves the two titles.

However
regarding ratu, the Avesta shows that
the Gathic tradition of choosing the leader was kept alive for some time and
that, for practical reasons, the office was given five grades: The ratus
of the house, the settlement, the district, the country, and the world.(Y19.18)
It, thus, covered all the basic units of the Zarathushtrian assembly. Each of
three professions of priest, warrior and prospering settler had its own ratu.
The ratu was the most competent and learned person in the respective
unit. The post warranted a love for learning, practicing and teaching religious
knowledge at all levels of society.(Y 13.1-3)

Still
later, we find that the title of ratu
was superceded by âthravan, the title
of the priests of the pre-Zarathushtrian cult. This was yet another deviation.
It gave the now thriving community its professional priests in place of chosen
leaders. They introduced their own eight categories of officiants. Now
ratu was generalized to mean a priest (Nirangistan 82-83).

The
Pahlavi rendering simply uses rad, the Middle Persian form of the term, and this does not help to
understand the semantic change in its meaning. However, it sometimes uses the
term of dastur and herbad
to explain the position. The two are conveniently translated as
"master" and "judge." The subtle meaning and the Gathic
concept of the "chosen" ratu is lost. It is not strange that we find
that the âthravan composer of the
Mehr Yasht completely ignores Zarathushtra and makes Ahura Mazda appoint Mithra,
the old god of contract, as the "lord and leader of the material world,
particularly men"! (Yt 10.92)
Perhaps this explains the recession of ratu
into a priestly officer who
applies penalties to "contract-breakers" (
Mithra-druj, false-unto-Mithra) and wrongdoers, and leads the
corpse-bearers to the funerary destination.(V 5.25; 7.71; 8.11) It
is because of this role as a penalizing officer that, with the
Pahlavi tag of dâdestân,
judgement and justice, some scholars feel more convinced that it stands for a
"judge" in the Avesta. Whatever the changes in the meaning of the word
and the functions of the position, one finds less and less of ratu,
and more and more of the well-installed priests as âthravan,
magopat, mobed, dastavar, and dastűr.

Although
mâńthra, thought-provoking message
is repeatedly mentioned in the Later Avesta, more as a potent, miraculous holy
word than a mentoring message, the term
mâńthran is very strangely absent. The âthravans never used it
for themselves. Perhaps they had lost the spirit of the manthric mission.
Perhaps being eclipsed by the âthravans, people of a separate school, the
manthrans, kept alive the pristine religion as long as they could and then
dwindled to be lost and forgotten.

Maga has
been mentioned six times in the Gathas (S 2.11, 11.14, 16.11, 16.16,
17. 7(twice) = Y 29.11, 46.14, 51.11, 51.16, 53.7(twice)
Although interpretations differ as to whether it means a " difficult task,
enterprise" (Kanga &
Insler), or "gift and reward," I, following Bartholomae and
Taraporewala, derive it from maz/mah to
mean "magnanimity," the name Zarathushtra gave to his universal
Fellowship. It is twice called maz maga, "Great
Fellowship" in the Gathas with a view to emphasizing the importance of the
movement started by Zarathushtra.(S 2.11, 11.14 = Y 29.11,
46.14) Magavan
means "belonging to Maga"
and therefore a "companion of Zarathushtra, Zarathushtrian."(S
6.7, 16.15 = Y 33.7, 51.15) In
the Gathas, it does not give the meaning of a religious leader but a person
belonging to the Great Fellowship. (2)

Zaotar,
Vedic hotri, is derived from zav/hve,
meaning "to invoke." The word literally means an
"invoker." Exhilirated by haoma/soma
drink,the zaotar of pre-Zarathushtrians times invoked gods and goddesses
before a fire by feeding it with animal and plant oblations that went up in
smoke. It is against such a smoking ritual that Zarathushtra makes his
contrasting statement: "I shall invoke seraosha,
Your Inspiring Voice, the greatest of all voices to reach my final goal. ...
I am the straight invoker, who,
through righteousness, perceive You with the best of mind. It is from such a
mental favor that I wish to work as an adviser for the settled people.
Therefore, Wise God, I am longing to have Your vision and communion."
(S 6.5-6 = Y 33)
This is the only occurrence of the word in the Gathas. The use shows that
Zarathushtra was the true invoker who poured his love out to have a divine
vision and that he was not a professional priest who fed the fire with oblations
in an elaborate rite of "murmuring" incantations. In fact, he prayed
with "a bow and uplifted arms" and
could not handle ritual utensils used by institutional priests. The term ustâna-zasta,
"raised hands, uplifted arms" occurs thrice in the Avesta, all in
the Gathas.(S 1.1, 2.5, 15.8 = Y28.1, 29.5, 50.8)

Besides
the above terms, the Gathas do not mention any formalized term which could in
any way mean a professional or institutional "Zoroastrian" priest.
This appears very odd by a person who was, we are made to believe, a priest by
birth and promoted or even founded the priestly class. In fact, while repeatedly
condemning superfluous rituals of the karapans,
literally "mumbling" priests and the kavis,
poet-princes of the old Aryan cult, the Gathas offer no substitutes at all
to replace them. The Zarathushtrian Doctrine wants the whole system out. It has
its own simple and sublime way of communicating with Mazda. The Aryan priestly
office and its functions have no place in Asho Zarathushtra's sublime songs.

The
Haptańhâiti (Y 35-41), Fshűsho
Mâńthra (Y 58), and Hadhaokhta (Sarosh
Hâdokht -- Y 56), three compositions in the Gathic dialect come next in
importance and chronological order after the Gathas. They have no word on priest
and priesthood.

Fravarti (Y
11.17-13.3), a late composition in the Gathic dialect, is the first to mention
the three professions pursued by the Aryans. The two stanzas
(Y 13.2 & 3) are, in fact, a prose complement to the preceding
poetry of Fravarânę or the
"Choice of Religion" formula (Y 12.8-9).
It is interesting to note the order of the professions as given by the two
stanzas: prospering settlers (vâstrya-fshuyant),
(2) warriors (rathaeshtar), and (3)
priests (âthravan). However, it is at
the end of stanza 3 that the usual order of placing the priestly class first and
the settlers last is given. This is obviously a still later addition. These
passages advocate that the most qualified person must lead his particular
profession. It says that the leader (ratu)
of the priests must be the most learned of them in the Mazdayasna religion. The
passages consider members of all the three professions of priests, warriors, and
prospering settlers to be the greatest strength of the Mazdayasna religion. This
important statement of considering the three professions as the backbone of the
religion has been repeated in the Vispered.(4.5)

Later Avestan Part

The
Vispered, the book for
"All-the-Festivals", is the first in chronological order of the later
Avestan collection. Its third chapter, clearly a later addition not in line with
the contexts of other parts of the Vispered, supplies us with the names of eight
officiating priests. It also shows that zaotar first conducted a roll call of all participating officiants,
leaders, and representatives of all the religious and social units of the
society, and then, for the congregation, recited, declared, sang, and revered
only the Gathas and no other part of
the collection known later as the Avesta.

The Nirangistân, Code of
Rituals (Book II, Chapter XXVII) describes the functions of each of the eight
officiants. Zaotar (invoker) recited
the Gathas and responded to the voice of the material world, most likely the
congregation present on the occasion for whom he conducted the roll call; hâvanân
(pounder) pounded and prepared the haoma drink. Âthrevakhsh
(fire-promoter) tended the fire, cleansed three sides of the fire vase, and
responded to zaotar's voice. Frâberetar (procurer)
cleansed the fourth side of the base and laid baresman twigs. Âsnâtar (washer)
washed and strained the haoma juice. Raethwishkara
(mixer) mixed the juice with milk and dispensed it. Âbere (water-carrier) bore water. Sraoshavarez (discipline-worker) supervised the ritual.

If other officiants did not come or arrived late to take their positions,
a zaotar could perform the entire ceremony alone, unless taken up by the late
arrivals. The person who arrived first, relieved the zaotar of his extra task
and performed as havanan, the second as athrevakhsh, and so on. The last person
to arrive took up as sraoshavarez. Perhaps it is because of such relaxation that
today the team of eight officiants, each responsible for a specific duty, has
been reduced to two, and that the raethwishkara (now pronounced as râspi), the seventh officiant, has, for no apparent reason, taken
over the functions of all the other six officiants. The zaotar (now Persian zűt,
zot, Gujarati joti) remains the leading priest and raethwishkara assists him
during the performance of a ritual. The names of the eight priests are mentioned
in the Vendidad (5.57-58) and the Ozirengâh,
the afternoon preparatory prayer (verse 5). Incidentally, the zaotar invokes by
reciting the Gathas but not like Zarathushtra with uplifted arms and a bow, a
posture that would help concentrate on what one prays and meditate upon it. In
fact the Gathic term of ustâna-zasta (uplifted
arms) is completely forgotten in the later Avesta.

The later Avestan priest is unable to lift his arms. He is too busy to do
this, too busy to concentrate and meditate. He has baresman
twigs, zaothra (water libation),
and haoma drink to handle, or to wash
the four sides of the ceremonial base. Their hands are full because they are
termed as aęsmô-zasta (firewood-in-hand),
baresmô-zasta (baresman-in-hand) or baresmô-stereti
(baresman-spreading), hâvanô-zasta (Mortar-in-hand),
barat-zaothra (bearing-libation) (Y
62.1; Yt 5.30,127; 10.30, 65, 91,
126; 13.26; 16.1. On how to spread baresman twigs and at which Gathic prayer,
please refer to Niragistan, chapter xii, page 460).

This explains why none of the assisting priests are mentioned as
participants in the Gatha recital. It also explains why most of the non-Gathic
Yasna chapters show the priest saying repeatedly either of the following
statements: "I declare and perform," "I wish to venerate with
libation ... and ... baresman," "with
libation and baresman placed, I wish to venerate," "I offer ... Haoma,
milk, libation, spread baresman, water, firewood, and incense," "I
give milk, water, firewood, baresman, and haoma ..." In
fact, with the exception of the Sections 9-11,
19-21, 27, 41, 52, 55,
57, 60-65, and 67, all the remaining 36 sections are but different editions of a
stereotyped theme of enumerating the yazatas
to be venerated with the above-mentioned elements. They are more of a running
commentary to tell the audience as to what the officiating priests are
performing.

Âthravan, the Fire Priest

Âthravans oratharvans, descendents of
Atharvan, a legendary Indo-Iranian rishi
who introduced the fire ritual and is the supposed author of Atharva
Veda, are the fire-priests who performed the soma/haoma ritual in the Rig
Vedic lore, and athrvangiras formed the sacerdotal class or race of men. This shows
their pre-Zarathushtrian presence. However, the term has since declined in
Hinduism. In Zoroastrianism, however, it has held the highest position. The term
occurs almost 40 times in the later Avesta. It was the first of the four
professions. (Y 19.18). The Hom Yasht (Y 9-11) says that Keresâni (a legendary
ruler), who stopped âthravans from operating in his land, was dethroned by Haoma
(here personified for the purpose). (Y 9.24). Paradoxically, Krshânu (Indic
pronunciation of Keresani) of the Vedas is a guardian of soma in heaven. The two
versions are a sign of Indo-Iranian schism in which the Iranian haoma priests
seemed to have deposed the ruler of the original cult and to have established
their supremacy.

Again, it was Haoma (yazata) which did not make a deadly empty-headed
women bear âthravan and good children because she plotted to cheat an âthravan
and haoma by eating the offerings made to haoma. (Y 10.15). In fact, he who
robbed haoma of its offerings was cursed by haoma not to have any of the three
professionals born in his or her house. The community had enough pilferers to
have haoma personally curse them. The three references of the âthravan in the
Hom Yasht confirms the Vedic version of the close relation between the âthravan
and the haoma rite.

The Zoroastrian âthravans, we are told, went preaching around within
their country, some outside the country, and some in far-flung lands, sometimes
never to return home again. (Vp 3.3; 9.2, Aiwisruthrem Gah 6, Y 42.6). The
travelling preachers are called homâya
pairi-jathan, meaning "savant itinerants."

The yashts reveal that there were two categories or schools of âthravans:
the memorizing (meremna) and the guarding (thrâyavan)
priests. It appears the "memorizing" one was the regular priest, and
the "guarding" one belonged to an "occult" order.(Yasht 4.9,
5.86, 14.5). Occult formulas given in Khordad, Aban and Bahram yashts were not
to be taught to any person other than one's son, full-blood brother, or a
"guardian" âthravan. While the zoatar
of the regular order had an open congregation and no one was specifically
barred from attending the prayers, the "guardian" priests of the
yashtic lore were ordained not to give any part of the oblation, animal or
otherwise, to an antagonist, whore, murderer, non-chanter-of-the-Gathas,
anti-religion, deaf, dumb, dwarf, hunchback, and others considered physically
deformed and mentally retarded. Aban Yasht of Aredvi Sura Anahita, a female
deity, even bars women from partaking the oblation! (Yts. 5.91-93, 8.59-60,
14.51-52).

The priests of the Mithra Yasht had a cult of their own. They had to
undergo a penance of a three-day-and-night bathing rite and suffer twenty lashes
in order to perform an oblation ritual of haoma drink and cattle or fowl
sacrifice.(Yt 10.120-122). It is strange that this practice of
"self-torture" is not spoken about by any other part of the Avesta.
The Pahlavi and Persian traditions are also completely silent on it. Therefore,
we do not know why it was abandoned to such an extent that no one has ever paid
any attention to a practice concerning the top yazata of the Zoroastrian
lore!

This "Guarding" cult is, most probably, responsible for the
re-entry of old Aryan gods as new "yazatas" and in doing so, their
yashts have Ahura Mazda introduce the relevant yazata to Zarathushtra (Aban
Yasht, Tir Yasht, Mehr Yasht, Bahram Yasht) because he happens not to know them.
In one instance, it is Zarathushtra who asks the yazata to introduce himself (Hom
Yasht--Yasna 19). It is interesting to know that these introductions happened
well after Zarathushtra had founded his new religion and as pointed out in Hom
Yasht, had already composed his Gathas and yet did not know any of these
important deities and the rituals performed in their honor.

But, let us leave the interesting and yet hardly-studied occult order and
return to our regular priests. According
to Aerpatistân (Sacerdotal Code), which presents an older stage of
Zoroastrianism, a priest was generally not a priest by occupation. He or she
only officiated when called upon to do so. Vendidad, a later composition, states
that an ordinary professional priest led a simple life. He was easily satisfied,
even with a piece of bread and was a contended person.(V 13.45)
A few, as already stated earlier, wandered teaching and preaching. Others
fed themselves at the houses.(V 13.22)
Some rich homes had their own domestic priests.(V 3.1)
Members of a royal house were told to treat the priests as their own
children and give them good food, a sign that some were not treated well.(Yt
24.9) His usual implements for
rituals were ashtra (whip), milk-bowl,
paitidâna (mouth-veil), khrafastraghna
(for killing noxious animals), sraosho-charana
(flogging instrument), strainer, standard mortar, haoma cups, and baresman
twigs.(V 14.8) One may take a
careful note of the absence of some of the implements used in modern rituals and
vice versa.

Vendidad cautions that one should not recognize as an âthravan a person
who pretends to wear paitdâna, girdle a koshti ceremoniously, take a flog, hold
baresman twigs, and carry a whip, and who sleeps throughout the night without
venerating and chanting and does not learn or teach anything. "He is a
liar."(18.1) Fakes and frauds were busy too!

Teaching and Learning

The
Gathas show that Zarathushtra was the first teacher who established a system to
teach, preach, maintain, and promote his divine doctrine. The foremost persons
he chose to train to teach at his school were Kavi Vishtâspa, brothers
Ferashaotra and Jâmâspa, and his cousin Maidhyoimâha.(Song 14.14-17 = Yasna
48) He composed his message in five
metric patterns and perhaps in as many or more tunes, and gave special training
to Jamaspa in mastering the message and passing it on to others. Jamaspa,
according to a tradition, later became his son-in-law and still later his
successor. The purpose of condensing the Message in measured meters was to keep
them compact and intact, free from any possible interpolation; render them easy
to be memorized; maintain their original pronunciations within the meters and
tunes; present and preserve them in melodies which would encourage people to
chant and sing them repeatedly--a very effective method of teaching the
thought-provoking words. Time has proven that no one, until the invention of
modern recording appliances, could devise a better way than that of the
Indo-Iranians to "human-tape-record" the very words of the composer
for a remote future. The Gathas are intact in Zarathushtra's own words and
dialect. They were preserved, one must say, by the âthravans who spoke another
dialect and later by the priests who did not know both--the Gathic dialect and
the later Avestan variety. They spoke and wrote in Middle Persian languages of
the Parthian and Sassanian periods.

Aethrapaiti, the Teacher

During
the later part of the Gathic period, we see the ratu hold a new title—aethrapaiti.
It means the master of an aethra,
and therefore teacher. No satisfactory etymology has been found, but most
likely, it is derived from â+i, to
approach, to come near, with the agentive suffix of thra. Whatever the derivation, it means a school, a place of
instruction. The term for the pupil is aethrya,
belonging to school. The first person to carry this title is Saena son of
Ahumstuta, the sixth celebrity mentioned after Zarathushtra in the Farvardin
Yasht list. It depicts his close association with the Prime Master
Zarathushtra. Aethrapaiti literally
means "school-master, teacher, preceptor." It is herbad in Pahlavi, hirbad and
hirbod in Persian, and ervad
in Gujarati. Saena is said to have trained "one hundred disciples who
taught on this earth," a proof of the universal missionary work of the
early Gathic period after the passing away of Zarathushtra.(Yasht 13.97)
It is, compared to today’s religious teachers, a fairly large number
for a small growing community of the thinly-populated world of those days.

Another person to carry the same title and with a new one, hamidhpaiti,
head of the assembly, is Mânthravâk son of Samuzhi who is the 61st person in
the list, a sign that he came two to three generations later. He is stated to
have combated the heretics who chanted alien gathas,
evidently songs dedicated to pre-Zarathushtrian deities who were being
reinstated by certain authorities, and who had "no lord (ahu)
and leader (ratu) among them." (Yt 13.105) In other words, these were the
persons who had deviated from the true Gathic doctrine by adulterating the Good
Religion with alien procedures and practices, and Manthravak combated them.

In the Avesta, an aethrapaiti is the teacher who teaches the Gathas and its philosophy
only. The disciple, called aethrya,
took at least three years to finish his or her education. He or she worked hard
from before dawn till late morning and again in the afternoon till late in
night, to learn the lesson.

Any Zarathushtrian could become a religious teacher.
All it required was that the candidate be the "most aspirant"
member of the family, that he or she did not deprive the family of its income,
that he or she was unanimously chosen to become an aethrapaiti.
Age did not matter. He or she could be the oldest or the youngest in the
family. If he was a partner in a
property with another person, he had to be chosen by the people concerned to
take up the task. He could accept the new profession only if he did not harm the
economics of the partnership. Both man and woman could assume the office of zoatar
or any of the assistants. When called upon to perform a ritual, a husband and
wife engaged in earning their livelihood from their regular occupation, had to
decide which of the two could economically be spared to attend to the task. A
wife, if required, could help another male officiant even without the consent of
her husband. One could even take a competent child to assist one in the
performance. A rare example of equality of sexes, a high regard for competency,
and a great sense of priorities, indeed.(Aerpatistan & Nirangistan 1-37;
Vendidad 4.45)

Aerpatistan calls the person thief, even a robber, who takes a woman to
assist him in a ritual but with an ultimate intention of seducing her.
Sexual harassment is nothing new. It also gives details on how far one
can take a child without the consent of the parent, but
it has no words on barring a woman from officiating during menses,
pregnancy, or birth, or of a male becoming polluted through wet dream. In fact,
with the exception of Vendidad, no other text speaks of such
"pollutions," not even the yashts which prohibit specific persons from
partaking their oblations. Evidently, the non-Vendidad school did not consider
these natural occurrences to be polluting.

When did the education start? Aerpatistan and Vendidad, as already seen,
would welcome it at any age. However, the assistance of a competent child in a
ritual shows that there were people who started early with their education.
Greek sources on the education of the royal young say that it began at the age
of seven and continued until the age of seventeen.(Zoroastrian Civilization
p.225) This could also be a clue
for an early start. The teacher (aethrapaiti))
or the pupil (aethrya) could be a male
or female.(Aerpatistan and Y 26.7-8, 68.12) The teacher was loved and
respected.(FrD.4)

A person had to study for three years under the guidance of a competent
teacher in order to acquire the proper knowledge and understanding of the texts
in order to become a priest. The pupil had to study hard during the first and
last parts of the day, and again during the first and last parts of the night.
He could only rest during the middle parts of the day and the night. He followed
the routine "until he can say all the words which former teachers (aethrapaitis)
have said."(V 4.5) The texts to learn thoroughly were the Gathas
and the Haptańhâit., They comprise
only.069 (1/14th) of the bulk of the extant Avestan texts and .024 (1/41st) of
the estimated bulk of the twenty-one nasks of the Sassanian canon.

It shows how long it took to master a short but very valuable volume. The
teaching consisted of understanding, memorizing, reciting, chanting, singing,
discussing, deliberating, and practicing the Gathic Message. The three-year time
shows how deep one had to learn the thought-provoking Message of Zarathushtra.
That is why Aban Yasht describes a competent priest as "a person of debate
and discussion, thoughtful, artful, indeed the thought-provoking message
personified."(Yt. 5.91) It may be kept in view that in those days, the
Avestan language was the mother tongue of the teacher and the taught. The pupil
fully understood what was taught and discussed. Furthermore, there was a
question and answer period to encourage a pupil to be a debater.

The Avesta or the relevant Pahlavi commentaries have no data on the
initiation of a pupil into a priest. But such an important task could not be
completed without an initiation. There was definitely one, most probably a
simple and solemn one performed between the teacher and the initiate/initiates.
Unless one accepts the traditional initiation to be an elaborated form of a
simpler ceremony, one should come down a number of centuries to turn to Greek
sources to give us a description of the initiation of a west Iranian magi in the
year 160 C.E.

It commenced, according to Lucian (Greek "Lukianos") in
Necymantia, on a new moon day and continued for full twenty-nine days. Each day,
the initiate took a morning bath while the teacher, facing the rising sun,
recited holy texts. He looked into the face of the pupil thrice during his
recitation. The two ate nothing but fruit and drank nothing but milk, honey, and
water. They slept outside in open. The last bath was by the master in a running
stream. The initiate was perfumed, and then given the priestly robes. (Aerpatastan
and Nirangastan, Introduction page xxxi)

I would refer the reader first to The
Persian Rivayats of Hormazdyar Framarz and Others by B.J. Dhabhar,and then to Dr. J.J. Modi's valuable book
The Religious Ceremonies and Customs of the Parsis, andMobed Ardeshir Azargoshasb's Persian Marâsem-e Mazhabi va Âdâb-e Zartoshtiân to judge how much this
description resembles the present day initiation ceremonies in Iran and India.
Not much, either because it belonged to a different school of Zoroastrianism or
the present forms in Iran and India have undergone many changes. The Iranian and
Indian modes of initiation, in spite of the close contacts between the two, are
quite different. These two also
belong to different institutions.

Most probably, the initiation of an adolescent as an adult and where
applicable, as a priest was simultaneously held at the age of fifteen years, the
Avestan age of adulthood. The Parsi term of Navjote
and the Iranian Nowzűd, derived from
the Avestan *nava-zaotar, new zaotar,
may give a lead. While Navjote means the initiation of a child with sadreh and koshti, Nowzud
to the Iranians means the ordainment as a priest. It is the same word with
different denotations.

Ritual Prayers

The
Gathas and their supplements in the same dialect have hardly any elaborate
rituals. They show that the
faithful, individually or collectively, faced a fire-altar and chanted from the
Gathas and the Haptanghaiti in a devotional posture.(2)
As far as the Later Avesta is concerned, the only ritual mentioned in Nirangistân
and alluded to in other parts is a
prototype of the present "Yasna" ceremony of preparing the haoma drink
along with its sacrificial meat and baresman twigs.
The only difference is that then the prayer texts were the Gathas and
Haptanghaiti and now we have the entire 72-sections of the Yasna and more.

The Gathas and Haptanghaiti were the only texts required for learning,
teaching and practicing, and for prayers. The
Vispered is explicit on this point for
all the Gahanbar celebrations, and so is Nirangistân
on its ceremony. There is no trace
of any other part of the Yasna collection of 72 sections nor there is any
mention of the Vispered or the Vendidad as a ceremonial text.
The Yashts recommend certain formulas to be recited at the time of
addressing a favorite yazata to obtain certain boons and benefits, and here too haoma
juice and other oblations are mentioned, but details of the rituals performed
for the purpose are lacking. However,
while there are the elaborate Yasna, Vispered, and Vendidad ceremonies, there
exists no similar Yasht ceremony. It
appears that Yasht ceremonies were abandoned after occult priests took over the
job of performing non-occult ceremonies. This
provided them with many more clients among the laity than they had before within
the occult circle.

Although the Vendidad speaks in details on purification baths and rites
for pollutions through dead matter and the disposal of the dead, neither it, nor
any other text, defines any ceremonies or the functions of a priest at birth,
initiation, marriage, or death. Relevant
Pahlavi commentaries also do not elaborate.
Tradition is the only guide, and it surely has changed and changes with
the passage of time.

The reason may be as simple as this:
Other parts of prayers were either still not composed, or if composed
(which is much more probable), were not incorporated into a formalized form of
rituals. In fact, the Sassanian
division of the nasks places the Vendidad and the yashts, some forming a part of
daily prayers at present, in the Datic category of the administrative wing of
the state. The Vispered and
non-Gathic parts of the Yasna were evidently parts of the Hadhmânthric category
which contained supplements to the Gathic and Datic categories.
This gives us a clue as to where other texts stood vis-a-vis the Gathic
texts placed together in one nask, volume under the name of Stot
Yasn.

A Hereditary Office?

There are no indications in the Avesta that show the office was
hereditary and that people of other professions could not join this particular
profession. Had it been so, there
would have been a prohibition to accept a warrior or an agriculturist in the
rigid circle. To draw a parallel,
Hinduism is very explicit on this point. The
very absence of a commandment making priesthood a closed circuit is proof enough
to make the profession an open one. As
already said in Spenta's previous
issue, the commandment in Khordad and Bahram yashts not to teach the
"spells" to any person other than a father or a full-blood brother or
an occult priest applies only to the special category of priests who dealt with
magical formulas and not to the priestly profession in general.
However, there is little doubt that in those days--and still in many
parts of the world--the general tendency of a child was to take up its parents'
profession, and a priest parent preferred the children to take to priesthood.

There are a number of Avestan passages which show that one was free to
choose to became a priest. The
Vendidad says: Should a person of the same faith, friend or brother,
approach another for goods, wife or knowledge, he should be given what he
requests for. "Let him who
wants knowledge, be taught the holy word ... (during regular parts of day and
night) ... until he learns all the words taught by former teachers (aethrapaitis)." (Vd 4.44-45).
As already cited in the previous issue from the Aerpatistan, the office
was not confined to any sex or age. The
only recommendation made was that the most aspiring person of a house become a
priest and that too without jeopardizing the economic position of the house.
Zarathushtra is shown in two late yashts as praying for King Vishtaspa, a
warrior by profession, to have ten sons--three to become âthravans, three
warriors, three prospering settlers, and only one to succeed the father as a
king (Âfarin-e Peighambar Zartosht.5
and Vishtasp Yasht.3). Haoma's curse on a fraudulent woman not to bear an âthravan
child makes the profession a general one. The
Vendidad says that a person, who chants certain Gathic stanzas early in the
morning, would eventually advance to know "the Gathas, the Haptanghaiti,
and the discussions about them," and grow into a thoughtful and artful
personification of the thought-provoking message, mâńthra
(Vd 18.51), the very qualifications of a good teacher.

The Pahlavi commentaries as well as Denkard's description of Aerpatistan
do not have any passages that would show the office was hereditary.
The Pahlavi commentary of the Gathic line (Song 6.6) in which
Zarathushtra calls himself a zaotar,
adds a few more of the Farvardin Yasht celebrities to make a team.
While Zarathushtra officiates as "the Zaotar
of the entire world," Vohuvasti son of Snaoya "from the happy
countries of the Religion" joins in as the Havanan, Isvant son of Varaza "from the countries of the
Turanians" as the Atrevakhsh,
Saena son of Ahumstut from the countries of Sainians" as the Fraberetar,
and Kavi Vishtaspa as the Sraoshavarez.
The ritual would be aimed at immortally renovating the entire
world (Denkard Book IX, Chpt XXXIII, paragraph 6).
The commentary clearly shows that the officiants belong to
different countries, peoples, and professions.
The absence of three officiants, including raethwishkara,
the "Raspi," the second priest in command at present, may be noted
with interest.

The hereditary system sprang into being when the priests of the old cult
joined the Good Religion and quite naturally helped in institutionalizing the
order.(3)
It was, however, still an open field, and any aspiring person could enter
it. Later, when the priests of
occult science, who guarded their secret formulas, became powerful enough, the
profession became, though still loosely, a family, or even a brotherhood affair.
As we shall observe, the Medes of western
Iran did have a priestly class. In
my opinion, the transition to a rigid hereditary system happened in two main
stages. The late Sassanian period
when theocracy was at its peak of orthodoxy and learning had almost become a
monopoly of the priests linked with the government, and again during the early
Islamic occupation, when the priestly power was at its lowest ebb and the
general condition of the Zoroastrians was getting from worse to abysmal, and
strict measures had to be taken to preserve the tradition.

According to Greek sources, the Magi formed one of the six tribes of the
Medes and were sacerdotal. They
were the officiating priests at every (Zoroastrian) function in the Achaemenian
empire. The sources also tell us about the simple and strict life the
Magi led. Some practiced celibacy.
Although no source speaks about the profession being hereditary among the
Magi, Prof. Mary Boyce points out that "from 5th century B.C. .... it is
thus in the west of Iran that the principle of a hereditary priesthood,
exclusive in character, is first encountered." (A History of
Zoroastrianism, Vol. I, p 10; also History of Zoroastrianism, Dastur M. N.
Dhalla, pp 136 & 295). This
could have partially contributed to making the profession hereditary.
It may be pointed out that just as magu--definitely
related to magavan of the Gathic Maga
Fellowship--is absent in the Younger Avesta, the term âthravan
is not mentioned by any of the sources on the Medes and Achaemenians--unless, of
course, we take maghu used once in a
derogatory tone in Vendidad (4.47)--"the man who has a wife is far above a maghu
(meaning a "celibate)--as the first instance, and moghu-tbish
(Y 65.7), now translated to mean a "fellow-tormentor," as the second
possible instance.

Was Asho Zarathushtra a Priest?

The
traditional life story, as told by the two Pahlavi writings, Denkard (Book VII)
and the Selections of Zadsparam, and the Persian Zartosht-nameh by the Zoroastrian poet-mobed Bahram Pazhdu, do not
state that he was from a priestly lineage.
On the contrary, his father took the doubting child Zarathushtra to
priests to have him convinced of the truth of the old Aryan cult, a task in
which they miserably failed. If he
were a priest, he would have handled his child himself. His mother, who, when still a maiden, was excommunicated and
banished by the priests for her unorthodox views, sent her son outside to a
teacher to learn the sciences of the day, a statement which may also supply the
clue as to where Asho Zarathushtra developed his poetic talents, talents which
some think could only be developed by a priestly boy.

The Avesta shows that Zarathushtra's father raised horses. (Yt 23.4;
24.2). The eulogy stating that
Zarathushtra is the "foremost" âthravan, warrior, and prospering
settler only shows his complete reformation of the three professions.
The famous stanza of "Ushtâ nô
zâthô âthrava yô Spitâmô Zarathushtrô--Hail to us, for an âthravan,
Spitama Zarathushtra, has been born," (Yt 13.94) only indicates that the
composer of the eulogy was an âthravan who obviously preferred to hail
Zarathushtra as the foremost "reformer" of his particular profession.
Had it been composed by a warrior or an agriculturalist poet,
Zarathushtra would have been hailed as the "foremost" warrior or
settler. It may be noted that the
second eulogy in Farvardin Yasht calls him ahu,
ratu and paoiryô-tkaesha (lord,
leader, and foremost-in-doctrine) and uses several superlatives to praise him
and yet does not make an âthravan of him.
The solitary use of zaotar in
the Gathas (Song 6.6) in which Zarathushtra, who repeatedly condemns the cultic
rituals performed by karapan priests
and kavi princes, calls himself the
"straight" invoker who does not indulge in any of them, proves
otherwise that he was not a ritualistic priest by profession and that he was
only an invoker, a true invoker indeed. His
Gathas stand the best testimony to his being non-ritualistic.

Above all, had Zarathushtra been of a priestly class, he would have
definitely mentioned it in his Gathas. He
did take enough care to give his full family name, Spitâma
Haechataspa on several occasions. He
could have added the term âthravan, at
least once. The three professions
or classes of society--priests, warriors, and the prospering settlers--are
absent in the Gathas and other Gathic texts.
This does not mean that they did not exist in his days.
The truth is that he did not believe in them as boundaries
dividing human society into three water-tight compartments.
The only profession he encouraged was the settlement of people in fields
of agriculture, animal husbandry and crafts.
He is the person who coined the term vâstrya-fshuyant,
"prospering settler." We
have no trace of it in pre-Zarathushtrian Avestan texts and the Vedas.
That is why he is called the Vâstâr,
meaning "settler, rehabilitator" of the oppressed in the Ahunavar
formula, the opening stanza of the Gathas.

Conclusion

Keeping in view all the above points, I come to the conclusion that:

1.
Asho Zarathushtra was not a priest, karapan,
âthravan, or one known by any other Indo-Iranian term.

2.
Asho Zarathushtra and his dedicated companions went spreading the message as mâńthrans,
thought-provokers.

3.
They were also known as Magavans,
belonging to Maza Maga, the Great
Magnonimity, the Great World Fellowship founded by Zarathushtra. This term gave
rise to Magu priests of a Median
tribe.

4.
The âthravans, professional priests of the Indo-Iranian Haoma/Soma cult,
embraced the Good Religion of Zarathushtra and managed to maintain their
leadership. It is they who put the
mâńthrans into
oblivion.

5.
There was no institutionalized priestly profession during the Gathic period.

6.
Even after its establishment as an institution, it was not necessarily a
full-time profession. There were
many part-time priests who attended to it only if their main occupation
permitted them.

7.
It was an acquired occupation and not a hereditary profession.
The other two professions of warriors and prospering
settlers were of equal importance.

8.
Any aspiring person, young or old, male or female, could learn the knowledge to
become a priest.

9.
The candidate for priesthood had to go through a rigorous course of at least
three years to attain the desired standard in Gathic studies alone.

10.
The training school was established by Zarathushtra and promoted by his
companions and their successors on a specific system.

11.
The extent Avesta and Pahlavi books have no description of the initiation of
candidate to priesthood, perhaps because of its simplicity or its usual
synchronization with the initiation into adulthood.

12.
The priest, far above being a "mumbler" of Avestan texts, was an
expounder of the religion of Good Conscience, an interpreter of the Divine
Doctrine, and a scholar of the sciences of his or her days.

The Zarathushtrian Assembly's Position

True to the Gathic tradition that every profession which promotes human
society is good and noble, the Zarathushtrian Assembly does not entertain a
priestly class or division. It has proficient persons who officiate at
ceremonies; act as chief witnesses at, for instance, wedding solemnizations;
lead congregational prayers; convey the Divine Message; and teach those who want
to learn and spread that message. Any able person, male or female, may qualify
to be chosen and recognized as a ratu,
a leader, aethrapaiti, a teacher, or hamidhpaiti,
an assembly head.

The Assembly direly needs such devoted, dedicated, learned, and wise
leaders, teachers and heads of the assemblies for the promotion of its chapters
with the aim of spreading the divine, thought-provoking message of Zarathushtra
and guiding its members and friends. The Assembly has the training of ratu,
aethrapaiti, and hamidhpaiti in
its program. These classes have
been introduced on periodical basis and are running well.

(1) With the exception of the
last two paragraphs added now, the above paper was read at "The Conference
on Zoroastrian Doctrine, Culture & History" under the auspices of the
World Zoroastrian Organization, London, hosted by the Zoroastrian Association of
Metropolitan Chicago, Hinsdale, Illinois, November 26, 1987.

(2) Magu in Old
Persian, and its subsequent terms
of magus
(plural magi), magian, for members of the priestly tribe of Medes during Median and
Achaemenian periods in Ancient Iran indicate that in later times, the word
became related to a priest and the priestly class. Nonetheless, the Pahlavi magog,
Persian mogh, Arabic majűs meaning"Zarathushtrian" and magopat,
"head of mago(g)" and
therefore a priest show that it continued to be applied to a member of the
Zarathushtrian fellowship and not necessarily to "priest."
Furthermore, maga is rendered magîh, magianship with a gloss "pure goodness." It is a
generic term. It is mobed (magopat)
which means "priest."

(3)
See Zarathushtrian Ceremonies, a
reconstruction, by Ali A. Jafarey, Ushta Publications, Cyrpress, California,
1992) for the details of the Gathic rituals.

(4)
As already stated, the âthravans (Vedic
Sanskrit atharvans) were descendents
of *âthrava/atharva, a legendry
fire-priest of the Indo-Iranian lore. A
study of the Gathic parts of the Avesta and the Vedas proves that the âthravans/atharvans
were not connected with the Gathic parts and the three early Vedas--Rig, Sâman,
and Yajur. The atharvans are said to be the composers of the Atharvaveda.
While the three Vedas belong to the higher class of Indo-Aryans, the
contents of the Atharvaveda, with their spells and charms, show that the
atharvans belonged to the superstitious laity. The non-Gathic parts also showa fall in style and material. Here
too the âthravan style is evident. "The Atharvaveda was treated as a late
addition to the Veda samhitas because
the sagacious successors of the rishis,
serving the princes and other aristocrats, knew well that it was an alien
collection, composed by the atharvans,
the fire-priests. It was not their shruti.
They accepted it reluctantly only when they felt the rising market for spells,
charms, and superstitions among the
ruling class, their patron princes. The
relevant parts of the Avesta composed by the âthravans had
better luck. These parts were accorded a high position because on the
Iranian side, the âthravans had
ascended to completely control the religion founded by Zarathushtra.
Therefore much of the surviving Avesta, older or younger than the Gathic
texts, is an "âthravan" composition.
I shall, therefore, call the non-Gathic texts as the
Âthrava-Avesta.

Here is my theory: Both the
Atharvaveda and the Âthrava-Avesta are compositions of the atharvans/âthravans,
the fire-priests serving the laity. In
India, the rishis dominated their society and their compositions were trayi,
the three samhitas of Rigveda and its Sâman and Yajur supplements. They were trivedins
only, not chaturvedins. The
atharvans were secondary in importance and their composition was not given the
high place the atharvans wanted it to have. The atharvans did succeed in rising
to a high position but at the cost of their very name.
They had to give it up and be better known as Brahmans and to have their composition be also called Bramanaveda,
a later name for the Atharvaveda.

In Iran, the conditions were very favorable.
The âthravans rose, quietly replaced the mâńthrans and the magavans,
and became the highest authority so much so that they even claimed Zarathushtra
was an âthravan. This was not
enough. They even put words into
Ahura Mazda's mouth that he too was an âthravan, nay âthravatema,
the supreme âthravan. The entire
Avesta, including the Gathas and their supplements in the Gathic dialect, a
dialect different from their own, was claimed to be the âthravan composition,
the divine composition revealed by the supreme âthravan Ahura Mazda, to an
ever-asking âthravan Zarathushtra." (The texts within quotes is an extract
from "Glimpses of the Atharvaveda in
the Avesta," a paper read by the author at "The Atharvaveda
Conference, held by the International Foundation for Vedic Studies, U.S.A., Dag
Hamarskold Auditorium, United Nations, New York; July 14-16,
1993.)